Rudock and Leshun Daniels bits

hwk23 said:
Wow, go off on tangents much. I've already addressed every one of these issues again and again so I guess we just agree to disagree.

The point of mentioning TMart was to show you don't have to be orthodox to be a successful QB. There are many other examples but TMart is the one that came to mind. TMart is on schedule to pass for almost 10,000 yards and that's really good considering Iowa's all-time leading passer is around 10,500.

Sokol is a better passer than TMart but really you have to take everything into consideration with QBs not just pretty spirals.

I would take TMart's stats his first two years with 7.8 yards per attempt. I hope Iowa runs the ball a lot (and succesfully) so we can afford to have as few passing attempts as TMart did his 1st two years.
Click to expand...

I AM taking more into account than pretty spirals. I don't call Martinez an average quarterback because he throws an ugly ball. I call him an average quarterback because he has a plethora of data that points in that direction. His yardage total is largely the product of being a 3-year starter to this point and being an elite runner (which Sokol is not).

You should also take into account that Sokol is currently dead last in the quarterback race, per Ferentz. So, again, someone here is talking out his ***. Is it the one guy who maintains Sokol is the best of the three guys, or is it someone among everyone else who says otherwise (including the guy who makes the ultimate decision)?
 
hwk23 said:
Wow, go off on tangents much. I've already addressed every one of these issues again and again so I guess we just agree to disagree.

The point of mentioning TMart was to show you don't have to be orthodox to be a successful QB. There are many other examples but TMart is the one that came to mind. TMart is on schedule to pass for almost 10,000 yards and that's really good considering Iowa's all-time leading passer is around 10,500.

Sokol is a better passer than TMart but really you have to take everything into consideration with QBs not just pretty spirals.

I would take TMart's stats his first two years with 7.8 yards per attempt. I hope Iowa runs the ball a lot (and succesfully) so we can afford to have as few passing attempts as TMart did his 1st two years.
Click to expand...


Are you going to be arguing for Sokol to start all season or will there ever be a point where you admit one or both of the guys in front of him on the depth chart are better? Seriously, atleast it made some sense when everyone thought it was still a 3 man race, but it's to the point now where it's clear Sokol is the #3 guy and you still refuse to budge that he's the best QB (still based upon 2 practices). I don't know if you've noticed, but it's making you look ridiculous.

For someone who initially started arguing Sokol is a better choice than Rudock because he can make plays with his feet I would think at this point you would jump aboard the Beathard train. He's probably the most athletic one of the three, and he's the one gathering some hype. Yet, you still stubbornly maintain Sokol is the best, and you're still making crazy arguments to try and explain yourself.

Basically every single post you've made on here (and on HI I've noticed) has to do with Sokol. Honestly, I find it very weird and kinda creepy. I think it's time to come clean... are you just obsessed with him for some odd reason or do you know him somehow which makes you feel obligated to fight for him?
 
DP5555 said:
Are you going to be arguing for Sokol to start all season or will there ever be a point where you admit one or both of the guys in front of him on the depth chart are better? Seriously, atleast it made some sense when everyone thought it was still a 3 man race, but it's to the point now where it's clear Sokol is the #3 guy and you still refuse to budge that he's the best QB (still based upon 2 practices). I don't know if you've noticed, but it's making you look ridiculous.

For someone who initially started arguing Sokol is a better choice than Rudock because he can make plays with his feet I would think at this point you would jump aboard the Beathard train. He's probably the most athletic one of the three, and he's the one gathering some hype.Yet, you still stubbornly maintain Sokol is the best, and you're still making crazy arguments to try and explain yourself.

Basically every single post you've made on here (and on HI I've noticed) has to do with Sokol. Honestly, I find it very weird and kinda creepy. I think it's time to come clean... are you just obsessed with him for some odd reason or do you know him somehow which makes you feel obligated to fight for him?
Click to expand...

I know you don't like what I write but there is nothing ridiculous about anything I've written. Either prove that statement and show me what you're referring to or STFU.

Ferentz said today he hasn't made a final decision and he said 2 weeks ago they were all equal so don't make it sound like Rudock is this obvious clear cut Number 1, he's not (or Beathard for that matter).

They both have had pathetic stats and looked pretty "meh" in all the games. Beathard's stats recently against the 2nd team defense were OK but still not better than Sokol's. THAT's why I'm not on the Beathard or Rudock train. They need to show something. I've been a Hawkeye fan since before Ferentz was around so I have a right to my opinion.
 
Last edited:
hwk23 said:
I know you don't like what I write but there is nothing ridiculous about anything I've written. Either prove that statement and show me what you're referring to or STFU.

Ferentz said today he hasn't made a final decision and he said 2 weeks ago they were all equal so don't make it sound like Rudock is this obvious clear cut Number 1 (or Beathard for that matter).

They both have had pathetic stats and looked pretty "meh" in all the games. Beathard's stats recently against the 2nd team defense were OK but still not better than Sokol's. THAT's why I'm not on the Beathard or Rudock train. They need to show something. I've been a Hawkeye fan since before Ferentz was around so I have a right to my opinion.
Click to expand...


They need to show who something!? You!? You've lost it... clearly they are showing plenty to the only people who matter. People who forget more football in 10 seconds than you've known in your whole life. It's ridiculous for you to claim based off of 2 scrimmages that you know more than coaches who have first hand experience with all of the QB's for the past couple years. The depth chart is what it is. You dont' have a clue what you're talking about.

Some other ridiculous claims you've made just off the top of my head...

Sokol would be starting and dominating in the pass-happy PAC 12
Comparing Sokol to T-Magic
Stats tell the whole story
Sokol's stats are just as meaningful even though half of the ones you're referencing came against back-ups

Obviously, in your opinion you've said nothing ridiculous. However, if you asked the rest of us I have a strong feeling the majority would agree that not only are some of your claims ridiculous, but you've got some sort of weird man-crush on Sokol. The only thing you've said that I agree with is you have a right to your opinion, and I have a right to tell you it's crazy.
 
DP5555 said:
They need to show who something!? You!? You've lost it... clearly they are showing plenty to the only people who matter. People who forget more football in 10 seconds than you've known in your whole life. It's ridiculous for you to claim based off of 2 scrimmages that you know more than coaches who have first hand experience with all of the QB's for the past couple years. The depth chart is what it is. You dont' have a clue what you're talking about.

Some other ridiculous claims you've made just off the top of my head...

Sokol would be starting in the PAC 12
Comparing Sokol to T-Magic
Stats tell the whole story
Sokol's stats are just as meaningful even though half of the ones you're referencing came against back-ups

Obviously, in your opinion you've said nothing ridiculous. However, if you asked the rest of us I have a strong feeling the majority would agree that not only are some of your claims ridiculous, but you've got some sort of weird man-crush on Sokol. The only thing you've said that I agree with is you have a right to your opinion, and I have a right to tell you it's crazy.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I trust my own eyes and the stats. Also, those examples you posted are not all what I wrote. The comparison to TMart was only to show that an unorthodox throwing motion can be successful. They split snaps against 1st team in the Spring game. Also I said the stats tell a story not the "whole" story. If you're going to try to trash someone at least try not to use too much BS.
 
Last edited:
RocknRollface said:
Basicaly everything you said up untill the last line does not dissagree with what i said at all and i nor anyone else said anything remotely close to all risk taking being good.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Tons of people on here claim that KF picks the guy who takes less risks. Why is that a bad thing? It isn't like it is a choice between JC and Vince Young we are talking about here, but rather a couple guys that are very similar.
 
deanvogs said:
What are you talking about? Tons of people on here claim that KF picks the guy who takes less risks. Why is that a bad thing? It isn't like it is a choice between JC and Vince Young we are talking about here, but rather a couple guys that are very similar.
Click to expand...

Your comment that "not all risk taking is good". Nobody said all risks were good. That's not what anybody said, ever.
 
hwk23 said:
Your comment that "not all risk taking is good". Nobody said all risks were good. That's not what anybody said, ever.
Click to expand...

Then why is taking a less risky player bad? Everyone talks like taking the "safe" player is a bad thing.

Most big plays are made not by taking risk, but by realizing what the D is giving you and taking advantage of it.
 
deanvogs said:
Then why is taking a less risky player bad? Everyone talks like taking the "safe" player is a bad thing.

Most big plays are made not by taking risk, but by realizing what the D is giving you and taking advantage of it.[/QUOTE


No one is saying the safe player is bad. They are saying a player can be to safe. To safe is better than to risky but somewhere in between leaning closer to safe would be perfect. Some people say stanzi was to safe his senior year. Most people would say he was to risky his junior year. Somewhere in between could have very well been better.
Click to expand...
 
deanvogs said:
Then why is taking a less risky player bad? Everyone talks like taking the "safe" player is a bad thing.

Most big plays are made not by taking risk, but by realizing what the D is giving you and taking advantage of it.
Click to expand...

People don't want a player, and we're talking mostly QB here, who takes "no" risks. They want a QB that takes the proper or optimal amount of risk. That doesn't mean all risks or throws are good. The perception is that JVB 2012 and Stanzi 2010 didn't make a lot of throws because they had been coached not to take any chances. There were a lot of cases facing single coverage last year where JVB should have been attacking downfield, for example. I think GD is working on fixing that per his recent comments posted on twitter.
 
Last edited:
hwk23 said:
I know you don't like what I write but there is nothing ridiculous about anything I've written. Either prove that statement and show me what you're referring to or STFU.

Ferentz said today he hasn't made a final decision and he said 2 weeks ago they were all equal so don't make it sound like Rudock is this obvious clear cut Number 1, he's not (or Beathard for that matter).

They both have had pathetic stats and looked pretty "meh" in all the games. Beathard's stats recently against the 2nd team defense were OK but still not better than Sokol's. THAT's why I'm not on the Beathard or Rudock train. They need to show something. I've been a Hawkeye fan since before Ferentz was around so I have a right to my opinion.
Click to expand...

We're talking about Ferentz here. The fact that he's acknowledged Rudock is currently the #1 and Beathard is #2 should tell you something. Personally, I can't wait for the season to start with Rudock and Beathard occupying the top spots. Then maybe you'll get off Sokol's jock and post something else.
 
PCHawk said:
Then why is taking a less risky player bad? Everyone talks like taking the "safe" player is a bad thing.

Most big plays are made not by taking risk, but by realizing what the D is giving you and taking advantage of it.[/QUOTE


No one is saying the safe player is bad. They are saying a player can be to safe. To safe is better than to risky but somewhere in between leaning closer to safe would be perfect. Some people say stanzi was to safe his senior year. Most people would say he was to risky his junior year. Somewhere in between could have very well been better.
Click to expand...

Ok, but how the heck do we know that any of the 3 play "too safe". GD is even saying he is coaching them to take shots when they are available.
 
hwk23 said:
Sorry, I trust my own eyes and the stats. Also, those examples you posted are not all what I wrote. The comparison to TMart was only to show that an unorthodox throwing motion can be successful. They split snaps against 1st team in the Spring game. Also I said the stats tell a story not the "whole" story. If you're going to try to trash someone at least try not to use too much BS.
Click to expand...

Since stats tell everything to you let's play a little game called name the QB (for bonus points you can decide which one was better).

Player A - 28,190 yds, 179 tds, 164 int, 6.8 ypa, career record of 73-69-1, QBR of 72.8

Player B - 27,633 yds, 173 tds, 220 int, 7.4 ypa, career record of 62-63-4, QBR of 65.5

Can you name the two...I will give you the hint that one is in the hall of fame.
 
Foval21 said:
Since stats tell everything to you let's play a little game called name the QB (for bonus points you can decide which one was better).

Player A - 28,190 yds, 179 tds, 164 int, 6.8 ypa, career record of 73-69-1, QBR of 72.8

Player B - 27,633 yds, 173 tds, 220 int, 7.4 ypa, career record of 62-63-4, QBR of 65.5

Can you name the two...I will give you the hint that one is in the hall of fame.
Click to expand...

Gonna say Joe Namath for Player A.

Edit: God damnit.
 
Yeah, I knew one of them was Namath once you gave the hint. I looked it up right after I made my guess (hence the edit).
 
Is it true that when Iowa plays a week form Saturday, they line up 4 rb's in the backfield and no qb?
 
Foval21 said:
That is wrong broadway joe is player b.
Click to expand...


Notice how player B has the most YPA. Anyway, those are fun but you can always find statistical anomalies. Also, it doesn't mean he had a good year every year. Joe Namath played a lot of years with bad knees I think. Stats tell a story and I bet they tell his story year by year. With that many INTs though I don't think he'd make KF's team, jk, I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top